Female Circumcision vs Male Circumcision(culture)

(This isn't a finished product yet. I am looking for opinions on this in combination with the first FGM MGM post as well as the conclusion. If you are going to attack me for this blog please read the first blog that compares female and male circumcision. Everyone seems to only equate female circumcision to infibulation which gets people angry at me and just leads to a whole mess of problems previous post
Conclusion )

The more I read my post and comments about female circumcision vs male circumcision, I realized that my first post was grossly inadequate. While I will not apologize for anything I said, I do realize that it was incomplete. The main thing I left out was the culture of each practice. I completely neglected why the procedures were performed. While I would like to deal exclusively with culture, the physical side and the cultural side are not completely separable. I will try to concentrate on the cultural aspects, but a reasonable amount of physical effects will make its way here. Lastly, before I begin, I would like to share two comments about the last blog that I feel are very relevant to this one.

"I am not fond of all of this comparison to assess which genital mutilation is worse than which. We shouldn't need to do it. Unfortunately, it is a pillar of male circumcision supporters that the male and female varieties are completely disconnected. Support of genital integrity for everyone requires disproving that lie when it is asserted."

"That is a good answer to the oft heard comment "you can't compare male vs female circumcision" which, when said, really means: "I want to complain about a barbaric act in another culture without having to own up to my own culture's barbarity. If I looked at male circumcision with a critical eye, I might learn that similar cultural forces are at work but that would be work and it's just so much more fun to not have to think."

I really like how each is phrased. The first gives a very good reason for making this comparison which I would not have formulated on my own. The second focus on the ethnocentrism of Americans. It really is amazing how we as Americans can criticize other cultures without realizing that we are not so very different. In all honesty comparing Male and Female circumcision for which is "worse" is silly. Which is the worse, torture, murder, or rape? Who really cares? They are all disgusting. Anyway, I thought I should share before I get into the comparisons.

In my opinion, one of the most interesting things about female and male circumcision is how similar their histories are. Perhaps the most central argument of most Americans about female circumcision is that it is a procedure of male dominance over women to decrease their sexuality. That is that the entire purpose of a female circumcision is to decrease sexual pleasure for women. This is fascinating as I still haven't heard anyone use this as a reason in a specific case. In all the articles I have read defending female circumcision, the females in the family are the ones supporting it and performing it. (ie (2))(3)(4) There is no mention of sexuality. Rather you usually hear things such as: it is cleaner, it is a rite of passage, it is a part of our culture, you will be like the other girls. It is quite odd that these reasons seem eerily familiar. Now I am not at all dismissing that female circumcision exists to limit sexuality at all. There is truth in that. No doubt it is the origins of the custom for many cultures, and it is still the underlying reason. Despite this, advocates of female circumcision never use this as an argument. Also, while this is relevant to some cultures that perform female circumcision, it by no means covers all of them. What is interesting is that the female circumcision advocates do indeed have evidence that it does in fact help prevent STDs. They didn't make it up as many Westerners would like to believe. (1)(2)

I detail all of the cultural reasons in my History of Circumcision post and in my Culture post so I will not spend to long talking about the male side of the story. The current reasons you know well. Male circumcision is supposed to prevent x diseases. Male circumcision will make you son more comfortable around others. Male circumcision is just what you do. Your suspicion that secular circumcision started as a medical procedure is correct. However, the disease that it cured was masturbation. Circumcision was known to cause pain, difficulty of masturbation, and reduced pleasure. Masturbation and sexual pleasure were seen as evil during the Victorian era and circumcision was used as a treatment for both. This implies that the secular use of circumcision started to perform harm to a male's sexuality.

Now when you look at the two side by side they are so similar that even a blind man can't ignore it. Both originated to curb sexuality and sexual pleasure. Both became a cultural decision rather than a rational one. Both are supported by the victims of the practice. Both are justified by supposed medical benefits. Culturally these procedures developed on a remarkably similar timeline despite having evolved, for the most part, independently.

This is where we diverge a little. Female circumcision does not describe a specific surgery. There are all different levels involved. Infibulation is commonly thought of as the worst, and Sudan can be thought of as the infibulation capital of the world. This actually is one of those cultures that does want to limit female, as well as male promiscuity. Males are merely meant to abstain from sexual contact. Female are intended not to enjoy sex. Women that show sexual arousal and enjoyment are seen to be "animal like." One western team of researchers traveled to Sudan to interview women who had been through the procedure. They would not discuss sexual experiences at all in front of others, but when they were taken aside where they could speak freely, they would often talk about how much sexual pleasure they had, and that they did experience quite fulfilling orgasms. They could not show that they felt pleasure, but based on their glowing faces it was apparent that they did. This led the researchers to conclude that western views of the effects on female circumcision are "grossly exaggerated". Now before all you women jump all over me and call me a misogynistic pig, this entire story is posted on fgmnetwork.org.(5) They do not in any way attack the research. On the contrary they are supporting it.

It is very difficult to compare the to two culturally. Male circumcision has two cultures. You have the religious culture with Jews and Muslims, and you have the secular and pseudo medical procedure performed in the US. The culture behind female circumcision is much more varied. However, as I describe above, all forms of female circumcision have more in common with male circumcision than most Americans would care to admit.


(1) Study on AIDS
(2) Muslim website designed and intended for Women
(3) Women wanting a circumcision
(4) New York Times
(5) FGM network